This blog has been sitting patiently empty for a while now, and I think it’s high time we got this party (or “par-tay”) started here (add “aight?” for snarkiness and irritating suburban attempt at “street cred”). On to the bitching!
So yesterday, with nothing better to do during the empty moments of my work day, I was reading the New York Times online. I saw the title of this article – and probably like many a person before me – said to myself, “Ooh, baby. SEX!” and clicked to see more.
I began to read:
Ideas & Trends: The Myth, the Math, the Sex
By GINA KOLATA
Published: August 12, 2007EVERYONE knows men are promiscuous by nature. It’s part of the genetic strategy that evolved to help men spread their genes far and wide. The strategy is different for a woman, who has to go through so much just to have a baby and then nurture it. She is genetically programmed to want just one man who will stick with her and help raise their children.
It was at this point that my angry feminist rage started to build. Once again, I felt I was reading a justification for essentialist sexual politics. However, as I, in my true angry feminist form, feed upon my own rage as fuel and continued to read.Turns out, the article was something I had been waiting for: a piece written in a nationally-distributed, reputable publication, which disputed the ridiculous notion that men somehow just need/want sex from way more partners because nothing says “I’m always horny! Time to spread some seed!” like having chromosome #46 be an amputee.
It seems that mathematical logic disproves that this disparity could actually be accurate, because, well… those female sexual partners have to come from somewhere. It also appears that this fact is not disputed by sex researchers who put out this information. They haven’t figured out a definitive answer for why the difference exists, but it seems to be that while there might be a slight difference, the numbers are exaggerated due to cultural reasons: men are expected to have more sex to basically prove virility, while women are supposed to be chaste and shun the “hoochie-mama” image. Additionally, it was suggested in the article that these surveys may serve as self-fulfilling prophecies, because without disclaimers to state that the data might be flawed, they may serve to perpetuate these ideas about sexuality and gender.
My response to all this?
“What took you guys so long?”
